hopefulgc
08-17 03:59 PM
isn't the date ... Apr 01 2004 according to sept bulletin
(not jan 1 2004)
If ur EB2 and PD older than Jan 01, 2004 probably you have chance to refile again. During this crunch time don't trust USPS/UPS. Always use fedex...
Hope for the best..
(not jan 1 2004)
If ur EB2 and PD older than Jan 01, 2004 probably you have chance to refile again. During this crunch time don't trust USPS/UPS. Always use fedex...
Hope for the best..
wallpaper Robert Pattinson, Wallpapers (
thepaew
09-17 09:31 AM
Hi All,
I am on H1 (beginning of my second 3 yr term on H1), EB2labor pending ( two US MS degrees in engineering) & I would like to apply for a full time MBA to NYU .
I would like to know if this is possible while being on H1. I know i can apply for a part time program.. but I would like to pursue a full time MBA or would I have to convert to a F1 ?..
How about pursuing a full time MBA with EAD ( 485 PENDING)
I would like to plan for a future scenario, as I would definitely want to pursue a MBA. Can you guys shed some light on this topic ?
Hi,
I looked in to this option as I had applied to a US Top 5 program. It is possible to do this on H-4 if you are married and if you are confident that your spouse can maintain his or her H1B status during the duration of your course. Of course, it will be a headache to get a US-based job or internship.
Hope this helped. Good Luck.
- N
I am on H1 (beginning of my second 3 yr term on H1), EB2labor pending ( two US MS degrees in engineering) & I would like to apply for a full time MBA to NYU .
I would like to know if this is possible while being on H1. I know i can apply for a part time program.. but I would like to pursue a full time MBA or would I have to convert to a F1 ?..
How about pursuing a full time MBA with EAD ( 485 PENDING)
I would like to plan for a future scenario, as I would definitely want to pursue a MBA. Can you guys shed some light on this topic ?
Hi,
I looked in to this option as I had applied to a US Top 5 program. It is possible to do this on H-4 if you are married and if you are confident that your spouse can maintain his or her H1B status during the duration of your course. Of course, it will be a headache to get a US-based job or internship.
Hope this helped. Good Luck.
- N
ampudhukode
01-14 05:03 PM
TiE is a good place too. Of late it has become very crowded I heard. If you have a specific area( ie. Wireless, Semiconductor, Enterprise Software) that you are interested in there will def be SIGs(Special Interest Groups) for these in most orgs and you can join them and network your way through.
2011 Robert+pattinson+kristen+
ksircar
01-18 07:36 PM
My 140 receipt date is July 11, still no word from NSC, neither RFE nor approval.
more...
BharatPremi
08-02 10:06 AM
EB3 with PD of July 2006. I-140 Approved. 485 +EAD+AP filed 2 weeks ago.
I was contemplating on job change before dates became current in June and decision to accept 485....
Now that 485 is filed and this DUST has settled, wondering whether all this is worth the wait. (even 180 days).
Currently in my 5th year of H1b, by waiting out the 6 months, I'll also get 3 yr h1b ext. (and hopefully ead by then).
So is waiting 180 days the best choice? or screw all this and change! (I dunno if this AC21 etc etc is practical...same job description etc)
(I am single and those complexities are not to be considered I guess yet.
Plan is to try and change jobs on H1b and use EAD only if there is a dire need like layoff to find another job quicker)
Normally it should not be a problem assuming your present employer is nice and you have good relations. If you leave the job before 180 days and if your employer says screw sundarpn then what will you do?:)
I was contemplating on job change before dates became current in June and decision to accept 485....
Now that 485 is filed and this DUST has settled, wondering whether all this is worth the wait. (even 180 days).
Currently in my 5th year of H1b, by waiting out the 6 months, I'll also get 3 yr h1b ext. (and hopefully ead by then).
So is waiting 180 days the best choice? or screw all this and change! (I dunno if this AC21 etc etc is practical...same job description etc)
(I am single and those complexities are not to be considered I guess yet.
Plan is to try and change jobs on H1b and use EAD only if there is a dire need like layoff to find another job quicker)
Normally it should not be a problem assuming your present employer is nice and you have good relations. If you leave the job before 180 days and if your employer says screw sundarpn then what will you do?:)
chapper
07-19 10:56 AM
Good Question - I'm also looking for an answer along these lines. We should work to find a solution
Can you start residency on EAD if you are the primary for 485? Meaning, can you use AC21 and change jobs from research to residency after 180 days from filing? Please help, really confused.
Can you start residency on EAD if you are the primary for 485? Meaning, can you use AC21 and change jobs from research to residency after 180 days from filing? Please help, really confused.
more...
purgan
10-14 08:17 PM
Another recent story on Canadian Skilled Immigration...
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=752a2097-a21f-42d1-b9c4-d15bab949d9f&k=9534
Geoffrey Scotton, Calgary Herald
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
gscotton@theherald.canwest.com
CALGARY - Alberta and the rest of Canada need to move quickly to boost immigration and take better advantage of skills so many new Canadians bring to their chosen home or risk being left behind in a global race for talent, says the head of Canada's largest bank.
''We must significantly increase these efforts and others if Canada is going to have the necessary human resources to compete in today's global economy,'' Royal Bank of Canada president/chief executive Gordon Nixon said to a dinner of the Immigrant Access Fund in Calgary Tuesday evening.
''Make no mistake, Canada is in a global war for talent. We must be a destination of choice for skilled immigrants and professionals or we will not succeed ... If we do, we will have a unrivaled advantage. If we don't, we will face an uphill battle just to maintain our quality of life.''
David Baxter, a demographer and economist with the Vancouver-based Urban Futures Institute Society, agrees with Nixon's analysis, suggesting Canada faces a ''perfect storm'' of demographic labour force pressures. Those factors include a declining birthrate, a massive number of Canadians approaching retirement and relatively fewer Canadians entering the workforce as they reach working age.
''You don't need a robust economy to be able to say there's going to be a problem here. We're probably now at the point now that without immigration our labour force stops growing,'' he said. ''This is a long-term issue, let's regularize it. We've got to move away from this talk of temporary (workers).
''What I would look for is young, healthy, intelligent, honest energetic people, preferably with an entrepreneurial spirit - and more employee sponsorship.''
Nixon argued that nowhere is the potential of immigrant expertise and contribution more evident than in Calgary, which is suffering labour shortages across the board, in all industries, from the unskilled worker to the skilled professional.
''Calgary is facing a shortfall of as many as 90,000 workers over the next five years ... by 2025 the shortage across the province will be well through 300,000,'' said Nixon. ''Alberta is at the cusp of a trend we're seeing nationwide.''
Nixon argued that immigration must be viewed by policymakers as a strategic economic development tool that will help to define 21st century Canada. He noted the country has in the past used immigration as a tool of industrial policy, particularly around the settlement and development of the West.
That kind of approach is needed again, Nixon asserted, as is better utilization of under-employed immigrants already in Canada, a phenomenon that RBC economists has estimated costs Canada $13 billion annually.
''We can no longer view immigration as a temporary employment agency,'' said Nixon. ''We need to start looking at immigration as a blueprint for nation-building, and we must find the right balance between social justice and economic need.''
Baxter believes that Alberta is making the strongest effort of any of the Canadian provinces to attract and efficaciously absorb new Canadians. However, he noted that while immigration policy remains largely the purview of the federal government, questions of professional accreditation and other determinants limiting immigrants' entry into the Canadian workforce rest in provincial hands.
''Alberta is at the forefront of this. The provincial government recognizes this (the need for more workers) and so does industry,'' said Baxter, referring to Alberta's Labour Force Strategy, released in July.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=752a2097-a21f-42d1-b9c4-d15bab949d9f&k=9534
Geoffrey Scotton, Calgary Herald
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
gscotton@theherald.canwest.com
CALGARY - Alberta and the rest of Canada need to move quickly to boost immigration and take better advantage of skills so many new Canadians bring to their chosen home or risk being left behind in a global race for talent, says the head of Canada's largest bank.
''We must significantly increase these efforts and others if Canada is going to have the necessary human resources to compete in today's global economy,'' Royal Bank of Canada president/chief executive Gordon Nixon said to a dinner of the Immigrant Access Fund in Calgary Tuesday evening.
''Make no mistake, Canada is in a global war for talent. We must be a destination of choice for skilled immigrants and professionals or we will not succeed ... If we do, we will have a unrivaled advantage. If we don't, we will face an uphill battle just to maintain our quality of life.''
David Baxter, a demographer and economist with the Vancouver-based Urban Futures Institute Society, agrees with Nixon's analysis, suggesting Canada faces a ''perfect storm'' of demographic labour force pressures. Those factors include a declining birthrate, a massive number of Canadians approaching retirement and relatively fewer Canadians entering the workforce as they reach working age.
''You don't need a robust economy to be able to say there's going to be a problem here. We're probably now at the point now that without immigration our labour force stops growing,'' he said. ''This is a long-term issue, let's regularize it. We've got to move away from this talk of temporary (workers).
''What I would look for is young, healthy, intelligent, honest energetic people, preferably with an entrepreneurial spirit - and more employee sponsorship.''
Nixon argued that nowhere is the potential of immigrant expertise and contribution more evident than in Calgary, which is suffering labour shortages across the board, in all industries, from the unskilled worker to the skilled professional.
''Calgary is facing a shortfall of as many as 90,000 workers over the next five years ... by 2025 the shortage across the province will be well through 300,000,'' said Nixon. ''Alberta is at the cusp of a trend we're seeing nationwide.''
Nixon argued that immigration must be viewed by policymakers as a strategic economic development tool that will help to define 21st century Canada. He noted the country has in the past used immigration as a tool of industrial policy, particularly around the settlement and development of the West.
That kind of approach is needed again, Nixon asserted, as is better utilization of under-employed immigrants already in Canada, a phenomenon that RBC economists has estimated costs Canada $13 billion annually.
''We can no longer view immigration as a temporary employment agency,'' said Nixon. ''We need to start looking at immigration as a blueprint for nation-building, and we must find the right balance between social justice and economic need.''
Baxter believes that Alberta is making the strongest effort of any of the Canadian provinces to attract and efficaciously absorb new Canadians. However, he noted that while immigration policy remains largely the purview of the federal government, questions of professional accreditation and other determinants limiting immigrants' entry into the Canadian workforce rest in provincial hands.
''Alberta is at the forefront of this. The provincial government recognizes this (the need for more workers) and so does industry,'' said Baxter, referring to Alberta's Labour Force Strategy, released in July.
2010 robert pattinson dog water for
gc_kaavaali
07-27 07:17 PM
When applying for H1B did u also apply for change of status? if you did you can start work on H1B from october onwards. If not you have to get out of the country and get it stamped.
I came to USA on L1A through company A in February,2008 and working on L1 A till date.My I-94 is valid till feb,2011.
I filed H1B through company B in April,2007 in India and got approved petition in August,2007. That approved petiton is with my company B in USA.I have not gone for H1 B stamping.
Now I want to switch to H1 B in USA.I was told by my friends that,I can work on H1 B with my approved H1 petition.and I need not to go for H1B stamping.
I need to get visa stamped only if I goto India and to come back USA.
Can I work directly on my H1B petition with out stamping visa?
Incase, stamping is required, Shall I go to canada/Mexico for H1 B visa stamping.
Can I come back to USA with my L1 visa from canada/Mexico incase H1 b visa not issued? or shall I need to go back to India from Canada/mexico it self?
I came to USA on L1A through company A in February,2008 and working on L1 A till date.My I-94 is valid till feb,2011.
I filed H1B through company B in April,2007 in India and got approved petition in August,2007. That approved petiton is with my company B in USA.I have not gone for H1 B stamping.
Now I want to switch to H1 B in USA.I was told by my friends that,I can work on H1 B with my approved H1 petition.and I need not to go for H1B stamping.
I need to get visa stamped only if I goto India and to come back USA.
Can I work directly on my H1B petition with out stamping visa?
Incase, stamping is required, Shall I go to canada/Mexico for H1 B visa stamping.
Can I come back to USA with my L1 visa from canada/Mexico incase H1 b visa not issued? or shall I need to go back to India from Canada/mexico it self?
more...
rockstart
01-28 11:28 AM
I think first thing is the job in your company needs to have a position that qualifies for EB2. Software Analyst, Sr Programmer Analyst, Sr. Designer can all qualify for EB2 what you could do is look up the SOC codes associated with EB2 and see what job titles go with those codes. Everything can start only if your employer has a need for EB2 position in his/ her organization.
hair Robert Pattinson - Cullen
gc_on_demand
09-09 11:46 AM
I would like to hear from people who have actually done this recently. My co. is planning to apply for a Software Developer position in EB2 and was wondering if anyone got it approved this year. My co. was able to do it for a colleague of mine under this title back in 2006 and I understand a lot has changed since then.
The downsides of this plan are:
1. Economy is bad
2. Software Developer does not qualify for EB2 (I believe there was an initiative taken to limit EB2s to Manager and above)
Also, Software Developer does not fall under Job Zone 5 in ONET.
Any help? Thanks for reading
What I heard from one of my friend that now a days DOL issues RFE left and right but if company is ready to file for new labor and if they have open position for it .. Don't wait. Even if you get RFE you will be in line ahead of many who is thinking to apply for Eb2..
The downsides of this plan are:
1. Economy is bad
2. Software Developer does not qualify for EB2 (I believe there was an initiative taken to limit EB2s to Manager and above)
Also, Software Developer does not fall under Job Zone 5 in ONET.
Any help? Thanks for reading
What I heard from one of my friend that now a days DOL issues RFE left and right but if company is ready to file for new labor and if they have open position for it .. Don't wait. Even if you get RFE you will be in line ahead of many who is thinking to apply for Eb2..
more...
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
hot Tags: robert-pattinson, edward
Bezzer
09-06 10:11 AM
yeah i like the fotter too! the grass looks cool. U do it in ps?
more...
house Robert+pattinson+and+
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
07-30 10:47 AM
your lawyer (and most of them including some famous on wwww) are dhakkan. They have no clue what's going on with vb. They just know how to fill some some form , that also they screw lot of time.
you are so right. I had to sit with my lawyer to file my i-140.
He is a b****. They do not know anything because their main motive is to get
customers and apply.
What will happen they can neither predict, nor bothered about it.
They just check the bulletin and tell you as if they know inside information.
bu*** shi****
you are so right. I had to sit with my lawyer to file my i-140.
He is a b****. They do not know anything because their main motive is to get
customers and apply.
What will happen they can neither predict, nor bothered about it.
They just check the bulletin and tell you as if they know inside information.
bu*** shi****
tattoo Robert-Pattinson-wallpaper-
kiru_99
10-30 03:22 PM
I don't know what amt was enclosed with the application. All I know it is rejected b'couse of Incorrect/No Fee. My concern is it was rejected on Sep 22nd & lawyer might have got the notice of rejection & he missed it or don't know what happened. It is already more than a month now. How much time is there to resend the application.
Thanks
-Kiru
Thanks
-Kiru
more...
pictures robert pattinson as edward
vamsi_poondla
02-04 05:05 PM
I guess you should be good with your AP . But also there was a thread about one of the IV'ians AP experience at SFO. Please read that so can understand what AP is for and when it can be used as per the IO at SFO airport
If a DUI can cause automatic rejection of I-485, will this be OK at the Port Of Entry? The answer is obvious. Should do as advised by the attorney not as experienced by others on a forum.
If a DUI can cause automatic rejection of I-485, will this be OK at the Port Of Entry? The answer is obvious. Should do as advised by the attorney not as experienced by others on a forum.
dresses New Moon Wallpaper - Edward
grajesh2000
05-02 10:32 AM
Count me in
more...
makeup Tags: Robert Pattinson
smuggymba
10-05 10:50 AM
It would be interesting to know the "process" used to legalize the illegals. If getting a GC when you're illegal is easy, I'd tear my H1 and stand in the USCIS illegal line.
girlfriend edward and bella wallpaper
MeraNaamJoker
08-13 03:04 PM
This seems to be a unique situation.
If the company does not object to your approval then you should be fine.
Please try to contact them or thier lawyer. (hopefully the lawyer is still in business :-) )
If the company does not object to your approval then you should be fine.
Please try to contact them or thier lawyer. (hopefully the lawyer is still in business :-) )
hairstyles wallpaper robert pattinson
Hey Ram GC
05-05 04:22 PM
RD is Jun 1st 07, ND is Jun 7th 07 - TSC
smartboy75
10-01 07:30 PM
Exactly my point. I could not read those numbers correctly and got a shocker until I received the receipts in the mail.
That's true too....lets wait and watch...
That's true too....lets wait and watch...
prioritydate
08-19 05:40 PM
Hi Friends,
My PD is Mar, 2005 filed under EB2. Me & My wife got an RFE asking status for a particular period [like May 01, xxxx to Feb xxxx]. These dates exactly fall under just one month before graduation to OPT expiration.
For my case �.. no issues providing evidence and everything is straight forward.
But for my wife �.we have some issue (I think)
USCIS wants her status from May 01, 2003 to Mar 01 2006.
She graduated on May 23, 2003. She used 60 days grace period before applying for EAD.
OPT from July 31, 2003 to July 30, 2004 [exactly one year and was looking for job�didn't find one]
We filed H1B in April, 2004 so that she can start working from Oct, 2004 [H1B approved for Oct 2004 to Sep 2007 ..extension approved too�]
But No status from July 31, 2004 to Sep 30, 2004 [USCIS issued a gap relief for all the F1 students like this]�.
What are odds that her case might we rejected�any opinions here.
Thanks,
Jingi
Di you submit all F1, H1, EAD documents to the USCIS with your original I0485 submission? Did you send any W2 forms?
My PD is Mar, 2005 filed under EB2. Me & My wife got an RFE asking status for a particular period [like May 01, xxxx to Feb xxxx]. These dates exactly fall under just one month before graduation to OPT expiration.
For my case �.. no issues providing evidence and everything is straight forward.
But for my wife �.we have some issue (I think)
USCIS wants her status from May 01, 2003 to Mar 01 2006.
She graduated on May 23, 2003. She used 60 days grace period before applying for EAD.
OPT from July 31, 2003 to July 30, 2004 [exactly one year and was looking for job�didn't find one]
We filed H1B in April, 2004 so that she can start working from Oct, 2004 [H1B approved for Oct 2004 to Sep 2007 ..extension approved too�]
But No status from July 31, 2004 to Sep 30, 2004 [USCIS issued a gap relief for all the F1 students like this]�.
What are odds that her case might we rejected�any opinions here.
Thanks,
Jingi
Di you submit all F1, H1, EAD documents to the USCIS with your original I0485 submission? Did you send any W2 forms?
No comments:
Post a Comment